|
Additional information is provided in sections d.9, h.3, h.6 and h.11.The returned instrument was received in its inner and outer blister covered with the tyvek lid foil, showing the lot information.The instrument showed no macroscopic signs of damage but exhibited surgery residues.It is returned in an open state.The returned instrument was visually inspected with the aid of a photomicroscope using various magnifications.During the visual inspection, no abnormalities could be identified.The forceps arms of the instrument opened and closed as expected and the grasping arms showed no bending, and no misalignment was found.No burrs or rough edges were present on the returned instrument.The instrument was then functionally tested and appeared to be working normally.Specifically, it was noticed that the instrument was able to grasp and hold the corresponding control weight, which indicates that the grasping force of the device fulfills its acceptance criteria.Therefore, the customer¿s complaint could not be confirmed.A review of the device history record traceable to the reported lot numbers, indicates that the reported product was processed and released according to the reported product¿s acceptance criteria.A non-conformance based review of the lot number was performed and did not reveal any potential contributing factors to the reported complaint.A root cause for the customers reported event could not be determined because the returned product met manufacturer¿s specifications.No action was taken as the returned instrument met specifications for tests performed in relation to the reported event.Complaint data for all manufacturer products is reviewed monthly to monitor for adverse trends.During the last review, no adverse trends were observed for the reported product and event combination.The complaint data will continue to be monitored for evidence of adverse trending and further action will be taken, as appropriate.No further action warranted at this time.The manufacturer internal reference number is: (b)(4).
|